### INTERIM RESPONSE ACTION (IRA) SUMMARY REPORT

Closure ofthe Hydrazine Facility

Final

May 2000

Jointlydevelopedandwrittenby the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, andthe U.S. Army, Rocky MountainArsenal 6432-1/1

00020069

### Interim Response Action Summary Report Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Table ofContents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................ 1 2.0 Background ............................................................ 2 2.1 Investigative Studies ............................................... 3 2.2 Nature andExtent ofContamination ................................... 4 2.3 Decision Process .................................................. 5 3.0 Work Performed ......................................................... 6 3.1 HBSF Interim Response Action Phase I ................................ 6 3.1.1 Bench-Scale and Pilot-Scale Testing Program ..................... 6 3.1.2 Characterization ofHydrazine Rinsewater ........................ 6 3.1.3 Analytical Methods Development/Laboratory Certification ........... 7 3.1.4 Full-Scale Startup Operations .................................. 7 3.1.5 Decommissioning ofthe HBSF ................................. 7 3.2 HBSF Interim Response Action Phase II ................................ 8 3.2.1 Rinsewater Transfer .......................................... 8 3.2.2 Sludge Characterization ....................................... 8 3.2.3 Hydrazine WWTF Deactivation ................................ 8 4.0 Operations/Monitoring Results ............................................. 9 5.0 Status ................................................................. 9 6.0 References ............................................................ 10

### Interim Response Action Summary Report Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility July 12, 1999

1.0 Introduction InFebruary 1989,the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA), theDepartment of the Army, the Department ofthe Interior, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR),the Department ofJustice (DOJ), and Shell Oil Company entered into a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) whichestablished procedures for implementing the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA) cleanup program as specified inthe Technical Program Plan. The FFA also incorporated many provisions ofthe modified proposed Consent Decree issued June 7, 1988. The Army and Shell Oil Company shared responsibility for the various costs ofthe remediation to be developed and perfanned under the oversight of the EPA, with participation by the State ofColorado. The FFA specified 13 Interim Response Actions (IRAs) determined to benecessary and appropriate while studies for the selection ofthe final remedy were ongoing. Closure ofthe Hydrazine Facility (FFA, Section XXII, paragraph 22.1 (h)) is one ofthe 13 IRAs. The objectives ofthe Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility (HBSF) IRA, as stated in the Final Decision Document (Army, 1988) were to meet the following specific criteria: Treat wastewater to levels that will effectively eliminate any substantial risks to human health andthe environment associated with the contaminants ofconcern (COCs), including hydrazine, monomethyl hydrazine (MMH), unsymmetrical dimethy1hydrazine (UDNM), and n-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA); Use a treatment technology thatis technically feasible and readily implementable; Achieve permanent remediation through destruction ofCOCs to designated action levels orreduce the toxicity, mobility, or volume ofwastewater; and Be cost-effective. The HBSF IRA task was separated into two phases that led to theclosure ofthe HBSF at RMA. Phase I included planning; wastewater treatment system selection and modification (including bench/pilot-scale testing); full-scale system installation; analytical method development and laboratory method certification; treatment system startup testing; and development ofan implementation document for decontamination, demolition, and disposal ofstructures and equipment atthe HBSF; and sitereclamation (decommissioning). Phase I was concluded with thecompletion ofdecommissioning

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZrN.WPD 1activities. Phase II included Ul-scale operational treatment and disposal ofhydrazine wastewater stored atthe HBSF and any wastewater generated during decommissioning activities (HLA, 1991 a). 2.0 Background RMA occupies more than 17,000 acres (approximately 27 square miles) in Adams County, directly northeast ofmetropolitan Denver, Colorado (Figure 1). The property waspurchased bythe US government in 1942 for use inWorld War IIto manufacture and assemble chemical warfare materials, such as mustard and lewisite, and incendiary munitions. Starting in 1953, RMA producedthe nerve agent GB (isopropyl methylphosphonofluoridate) until late 1957. A significant amount ofchemical warfare materials destruction also tookplace during the 1950s and 1960s. In additionto these military activities, majorportions ofthe plant facilities were leased to private industries, including Shell Oil Company, between 1947 and 1982, forthe manufacture of various insecticides and herbicides. The RMA site wasproposed to the National Priorities List (NPL) in 1984 and formally designated as a Superftind site inJuly 1987. The HBSF, which was operated by RMA for theU.S. AirForce (USAF) between 1962 and 1982, is located east ofthe South Plants area (Figure 2). The 10-acre siteconsists of two tank yards, each completely surrounded by security fencing. The yards are connected by two overhead pipelines. The HBSF wasused as adepot to receive, blend, store, and distribute hydrazine fuel compounds manufactured elsewhere. Theprimary operation wasblending ofanhydrous hydrazine and UDMH to produce Aerozine 50. Blending operations were notcontinuous and occurred inresponse to requests by the USAF. Other operations at the HBSF included loading and unloading rail cars and tanker trucks, destructing off-specification Aerozine 50, and storing Aerozine 50, anhydrous hydrazine, MMH, monopropellent hydrazine, hydrazine 70, UDMH, and hydrazine (Army, 1988). Hydrazine and UDMH are unstable inthe natural environment andrapidly decompose when exposed to the atmosphere. One ofthedecomposition products ofUDMH is Nnitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), a suspected human carcinogen. From January through March 1982, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) surveyed the HBSF and detected thepresence ofairborne NDMA within the HBSF inexcess of allowable exposure limits. In May 1982, RMA suspended operations and closed the HBSF to all but safety-essential or emergency-response entries. On September 20, 1982, the Director ofEnergy Management at the San Antonio Air Logistics Center, Kelly AirForce Base, Texas, verbally notified RMA management that the hydrazine mission would be phased out; all productwas to be blended andremoved as soon as possible. Air sampling programs conducted by theArmy Envirom-nental

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZ1N.WPD 2Hygiene Agency (AEHA) inDecember 1982 and January 1983 concluded thatNDMA waspresent as an air contaminant at the HBSF site. In April 1983, RMA conducted an intensive effort to repair UDMH leaks inthe fuel system. Two rounds oftesting and repairs were accomplished; however, area air sampling conducted after the second round still indicated the presence ofNDMA. At ameeting between the USAF andthe Army, May 5and 6, 1983, it was agreedthat the best approach to eliminate the presence of NDMA was to remove all fuel and to decontaminate the HBSF facility. To this end, the last shipment ofhydrazine was removed from the site atthe end ofApril 1986 (IT Corp, 1993). Following the discontinuation ofoperations at the HBSF in 1983, tanks thatwere used to store hydrazine fuel compounds were decontaminated. The decontamination procedure consisted ofpumping a sodium hypochlorite solution through horizontal hydrazine fuel storage tanks HAS-1, HAS-2, HAS-3, CS-1, US-1, and US-2, located at the westarea of the HBSF. The decontamination solutionwas subsequently pumped into tanks US-3 and US-4 located atthe east area ofthe HBSF. In addition, an in-ground concrete sump located inthewest area ofthe HBSF received water usedto decontaminate various portions ofthe HBSF (Figure 3). Secondary containment structures associated with hydrazine fuel storage tanks HAS-1, HAS-2, HAS-3, CS-1, US-1, and US-2 were connected to the in-ground concrete sump viaburied pipelines. Volumes ofwastewater stored intanks US-3, US-4, andthe in-ground concrete sump were approximately 50,000 gallons, 200,000 gallons, and 40,000 gallons, respectively (HLA, 1991). 2.1 Investigative Studies A RMA memorandum forthe record in 1976, describes the HBSF as continuing to be a neglected facility receiving lowpriority inUSAF support, and amilitary construction project data sheet from 1978, described the facility as having beenin operation for 18 years, withonly minor upgrading. Site inspections ofthe facility in 1978 revealed that almost every major fuel product line valve was leaking and at least three were frozen in the openposition. The inspection noted that inmany areas the pipe insulation had deteriorated, exposing thepiping to the weather (Ebasco, 1988). Previous investigative studies conducted atthe HBSF included a soil gas survey and Contamination Assessments (Phases I andII). The soil gas survey was conducted in 1983 at theHBSF. The soil gas detectors were placed at 16 sample locations: two in the east yard, one between theyards, three outside thewest yard, and ten in the west yard. The detectors consisted ofcurie point wires tipped with an absorbent. These detectors were covered with aluminum cans, buried in shallow holes inthe soil, and left inplace for seven days. Afterrecovery, the contents ofthe absorbent were analyzed using amass spectrometer. Any hydrazine and related hydrazine fuels thatwere trapped inthe wire Aetectors were expected tobreak down during this process, producing nitrogen and other analytes.

UAWPDOCS\RYDRAZ1N.WPD 3The HBSF was investigated under the Phase I Contamination Assessment inthe spring of 1986. Prior to conducting field work, a field reconnaissance ofthis site was conducted to assess and stake the boring locations. During the field program several ofthe proposed Phase I borings were relocated to areas where potential contamination was more likely, such as low areas and along railroad tracks where loading and unloading operations could have caused leaks or spills. A total of 15 soil borings, yielding 54 samples, were drilled to depths ranging from 5 to 40 feet below ground surface. Samples were analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) forvolatile organics and semivolatile organics; by an inductively coupled argonplasma (ICP) screen for metals; and by separate analyses for hydrazines, nitrosamines, dibromochloropropane, arsenic, and mercury. The intent ofthe Phase I field program wasto delineate aworst-case volume of potentially contaminated soil atthe HBSF; however, Phase II field investigations were proposed to further define the Phase I findings (Ebasco, 1988). The Phase IIprogram was conducted to further define local occurrences ofpotential contamination within the site and to assess the presence ofhydrazines and nitrosamines in specific areas not sampled during Phase 1. During the Phase II field program, 37 borings (16 drilled to approximately 5 feet, I drilled to 6 feet, 9 drilled to 10 feet, 8 drilled to 15 feet, I drilled to 20 feet, I drilled to 22.5 feet, and I drilled to 25 feet) yielded 104 samples (Ebasco, 1989). Samples collected during the Phase IIprogram were analyzed for volatile halogenated compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, organochlorine compounds, organosulfur compounds, organonitrogen compounds and metals. No samples were analyzed for hydrazines because the laboratory was unable to complete U.S. Army Toxic Hazardous Materials Agency (USATHAMA) certification ofa Phase II gas chromatography (GC) method forhydrazines in the time allotted. 2.2 Nature and Extent ofContamination The soil gas samples collected during the 1983 soil gas survey were analyzed using a mass spectrometer to detect any hydrazine andrelated hydrazine fuels that were trapped on the wire detectors. Hydrazine and related fuels were expected to have broken down during this process, producing nitrogen and other analytes. Levels ofnitrogen over 20 times background values were detected in the mass spectrometric results. However, because nitrogen was measured, and not hydrazines, this indirect method was neither intended to, nor capable of,confirming the presence ofhydrazine inthe soil or groundwater beneath the HBSF (Ebasco, 1988). Phase I soil samples from the HBSF contained methylisobutyl ketone, dieldrin, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc, and arsenic. The number ofsamples containing these analytes, and the concentration range, median, mean, standard deviation, and detection limit, are listed in Table 1. In samples from the alluvium, all ofthe previously listed compounds were found in or near thewest yard ofthe HBSF, or under the overhead pipe connecting the two yards (Ebasco, 1988).
UAWPDOCS\HYDRAZ1N.WPD 4PhaseIl soil samples from the HBSF contained aldrin, hexachlorocyclopentadiene, dieldrin, endrin, isodrin,dichlorodiphenylethane, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc, arsenic, and mercury. The number ofsamples containing each analyte andthe concentration range, median, mean standard deviation and detection limit, are listed in Table 2 (Ebasco, 1989). Aswith the Phase I soils data, the metals data are believedto benaturally occurring inthe samples obtained from the bedrock (Ebasco, 1988). 2.3 Decision Process The HBSFwas identified inthe FFA (DOJ, 1989) as acontaminant source requiring an IRA. The Army had already prepared aDecision Document (Army, 1988) which evaluated thefollowing six alternatives for thetreatment and disposal ofliquid waste products stored atthe HBSF: Chlorination/ultraviolet (UV) light Ozonation Evaporation pond, Off-site incineration Ozone/UV light UV light/chemical oxidation From these alternatives the Final Decision Document (Army, 1988) selected the UV light/chemical oxidation process forthe treatment ofrinsewater and disposal ofthe treated water tothe RMA Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) asthe preferred treatment and disposal alternative. TheFinal Decision Document also cited dismantlement and disposal oftheHBSF structures. AnImplementation Document for Phase I (HLA, 1991 a) documented the design portion ofPhaseI forthe HBSV IRA. The design portion ofPhase I included bench- and pilotscale testing ofUV light/chemical oxidation systems fortreatment ofhydrazine rinsewater, characterization ofthe hydrazine rinsewater, analytical methods development and laboratory certification for analysis ofhydrazine fuel compounds (hydrazine, MMH, andLTDMH) and NDMA inrinsewater stored atthe HBSF, and full-scale startup testing ofa UV light/chemical oxidation treatment system (HLA, 1991 a). OnNovember 14, 1991,the Army issued an Amendment tothe Final Decision Document (HLA, 1991c) citing transfer ofthehydrazine rinsewater from the HBSF to PondA at BasinF and incineration ofthe rinsewater along withthe BasinF liquids inthe submerged quench incinerator (SQI) as thepreferred treatment and disposal alternative in lieu oftreatment viathe LTV light/chemical oxidation process and disposal tothe STP. An Implementation Document for Phase11 (HLA, 1991 b) documented this designportion of Phase II for the HBSF IRA consisting oftransferring the hydrazine rinsewater from the

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZrN.WPD 5HBSF to the Pond A surface impoundment for the BasinF liquid and incinerating the hydrazine rinsewater with theBasinF liquid inthe SQI at RMA (HLA, 1991b). 3.0 Work Performed TheHBSF IRAwas accomplished intwo phases, which led tothe complete decominissioning oftheHBSF. The following two subsections summarize thephases. This information was obtained ftomthe Final Decommissioning Technical Report (HLA, 1992). 3.1 IIBSF Interim Response Action Phase I Phase I ofHBSF IRAincluded bench- andpilot-scale testing ofLTV light/chemical oxidation treatment systems,rinse water characterization, analytical methods development and laboratory certification, full-scale startup operations, and decommissioning ofthe HBSF. The following paragraphs summarize these Phase I activities. 3.1.1 Bench-Scale and Pilot-Scale Testing Program Bench- and pilot-scale testing were performed atthe manufacturing facilities ofqualified vendors ofUV light/chemical oxidation systems toevaluate whether the currently available technology was capable oftreating the hydrazine rinse water stored atthe HBSF tothe action levels identified for thisIRA. In general, the results from thebench- and pilot-scale testing program indicated that the hydrazine fuel compounds couldbe reduced to belowmethod reporting limits (MRLs), and NDMA could bereduced to lessthan 0.2 micrograms per liter (Ag/1). These removal results werejudged adequate for the purpose ofselecting avendor to conduct filll-scale startup testing. On the basis ofperformance results, inconjunction with other evaluation criteria, theUV light/chemical oxidation systemmanufactured byPSI was selected foruse inthe ftill-scale startup testing program. 3.1.2 Characterization ofHydrazine Rinse Water During January 1990, samples were collected ftorn tanks US-3 and US-4 and the inground concrete sump atthree depths. The samples were analyzed for various constituents ofinterest, in addition toNDMA and the hydrazine fuel compounds, to provide characterization oftherinse water forplanned HBSF IRA activities. Analytical results indicated tankUS-4 contained thehighest concentrations ofNDMA and hydrazine fuel compounds. 3.1.3 Analytical Methods Development/Laboratory Certification

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZ1N.WPD 6Methods were successfully developed and certified inaccordance with the Program Manager for RMA (PMRMA) laboratory certification program forNDMA, hydrazine, MME, and UDMH. The concentrations to which certified reporting limits (CRLs) were obtained are reported in Table 3. The CRLs are adequate to achieve the action level specified inthe final Decision Document for LJDMH (25 ýzg/l) andto exceed the Decision Document action level of20,ug/1 forMMH. A technology-based action level was established for,hydrazine on thebasis ofanalytical method development andmethod certification ofhydrazine inrinse water at a CRL of9.9,ug/l. A technology-based action level was established for NDMA at 5Mg/I on the basis oftreatment results demonstrated inthe startup testing program. 3.1.4 Full-Scale Startup Operations From September toDecember 1989, theArmy constructed the Hydrazine Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) for full-scale startup operations. Various operating procedures and adjustments involving pretreatment for ironremoval, pH, UV intensity, hydrogen peroxide concentration, and treatment time were tested and evaluated during full-scale startup testing ofthe UV light/chemical oxidation treatment system. Treatment ofnine batches (approximately 1,100 gallons per batch) wasperformed. An air-monitoring program was conducted during full-scale startup testing at the WWTF tomonitor and evaluate the integrity ofthe UV light/chemical oxidation treatment system and to monitorpersonnel during operation and maintenance ofthe facility. Several methods for evaluating concentrations ofhydrazine, MMH, UDMH, NDMA, and volatile organic compounds in air wereused. Results ofthe monitoring program indicated that concentrations ofthe hydrazine fuel compounds were well below regulatory and recommended limits. Because low concentrations ofNDMA were consistently detected, supplied airwas used by operations personnel during full-scale startup testing. 3.1.5 Decommissioning ofthe HBSF During October 1989, an inventory ofthe HBSF sitewas conducted to review and verify previous investigation reports and assess overall site conditions for planning ofthe decontamination, demolition, andrestoration ofthe HBSF site. Quantities, condition, and materials ofconstruction for aboveground and buried piping, tanks, structures, and other facilities were assessed. From May 1991 toJuly 1992, IT decontaminated, demolished, and disposed HBSF structures both aboveground andbelow ground. Details ofthe decommissioning activities are presented inthe IT final report (IT Corp, 1993).

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZrN.WPD 73.2 HBSF Interim Response Action Phase 11 Phase 11 ofthe HBSF IRA included rinse water transfer, sludge characterization, and Hydrazine WWTF deactivation. Thefollowing paragraphs summarize these Phase Il activities. 3.2.1 Rinse Water Transfer Because the Amendment tothe Final Decision Document (HLA, 199 1 c) revising the plan fortreatment and disposal ofthehydrazine stored rinse water,the rinse water was transferred from the HBSF to the Basin FPond Afor later incineration as part ofthe Basin F IRA. The rinse water stored intanks US-3, US-4, and the in-ground concrete sump and decontamination waterfrom decommissioning activities were transferred via vacuum tanker truck from the east and west areas oftheHBSF. Approximately 310,200 gallons ofrinse waterwere transferred toPond A, including stored hydrazine rinse water, decommissioning decontamination water, precipitation runoff,and decontamination water from deactivation ofthe Hydrazine WWTF. 3.2.2 Sludge Characterization On January 24, 1992, HLA collected one sludge sample each from tanks US-3 and US-4. (No sludge material was encountered inthe in-ground concrete sump after transfer of rinse water.) The samples were analyzed toassess the hazardous nature ofthe sludge using the standard Environmental Protection Agency Test Method forEvaluating Solid Waste (SW-846). Atthe request ofPMRMA, HLA also analyzed the samples for chemicals historically associated with activities at RMA, in addition to contaminants regulated under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The sludge samples didnot exceed theRCRA regulatory limits, i.e., the sludge didnot exhibit any ofthe four characteristics (toxicity, ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity) required to be classified as a RCRA characteristic waste. 3.2.3 Hydrazine WWTF Deactivation Deactivation ofthe Hydrazine WWTF was completed inJune 1992. The deactivation included the following activities: 0 Draining and rinsing oftanks 0 Dismantling, draining, and flushing ofpiping 0 Scrubdown ofthe facility floor and walls 0 Demobilization ofrental equipment 0 Inventory ofproperty a General cleanup

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZrN.WPD 8In summary the IRA forthe HBSF began inApril 1989 and was completed in July 1992. The cost forthe HBSF IRA was $13,800,000. 4.0 Operations[Monitoring Results On February 26, 1993, theU.S. Army Corps ofEngineers modified its contract with ITto incorporate a soil borehole drilling and sampling program atthe HBSF. The modification required IT to drill23 boreholes, analyze the soil samples using aqualified laboratory, and deten-nine ifhydrazine compounds and/or NDMA were present inthe soilsbased on these analyses. The drilling was conducted with aCME 75 mobile drilling rig equipped with an 8.5-inch O.D. continuous Right hollow stem auger. The soil samples were collected in 1.5-foot and 2-foot long sample tubes equipped with stainless steel liners. Soil samples were analyzed for hydrazine compounds, NDMA, volatiles, semivolatiles/organochlorine pesticides and heavy metals. After completion ofthe boreholes, the soil borings were backfilled with soil cuttings to an elevation ofno less than one foot from the ground surface and then groutedto grade (IT Corp, 1993). Airmonitoring and sampling were conducted during this drilling and sampling event. This program consisted ofreal-time airmonitoring forhydrazine, organics, inorganics, flammability limits, and oxygen concentrations. Air sampling and analysis were performed forN-nitroso compounds. Analytical results ofair sampling for N-nitroso compounds during drilling operations reported no measurable quantities ofNDNIA. After thedrilling and sampling activities were completed, the drillrig, augers and sampling equipment were decontaminated at atemporary equipment decontamination pad. The wastewater generated during decontamination activities was transported tothe Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) WWTF fordisposal. Hydrazine compounds (hydrazine, MMH, and UDMH) were detected (at aconcentration less thanthe certified reporting limit) in soil boringNos. SB-06 and SB- 14. NDMA was detected atborehole Nos. SB-06, SB-10, SB-11, and SB-13. The highest concentration ofNDMA was located atboring No. SB-13 (0.062 Iig/g), directly beneath the former location ofstorage tank CS- I (IT Corp., 1993). 5.0 Status The HBSF IRA was completed in 1992. Uncontaminated materials atthe sitewere salvaged forrecycling and reuse, and contaminated materials were disposed at an offpost permitted hazardous waste landfill. The area encompassing theformer facility was regraded and revegetated following demolition and debris removal (Army, 1996).

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZ1N.WPD 96.0 References Department ofthe Army. Final Decision Document forthe Interim Response Action at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility. October 1988. DCN: 198-RII-RT-GNQM Department ofthe Army. Record ofDecision forthe On-Post Operable Unit. June 1996. Document ControlNumber: 3102-036-RT-BJFM Ebasco Services Inc. Draft Final Report Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Wastewater Treatment and Decommissioning Assessment Version 2.2. April 1988. DCN: 198-RII-RT-GBKX Ebasco Services Inc. Final Phase I Contamination Assessment Report Site 1-7 Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Version 3.2. September 1988. DCN: 198-Rll-RTGNQP Ebasco Services Inc. Final Phase II Data Addendum Site 1-7 Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Version 3.1. February 1989. DCN: TES Harding LawsonAssociates (1991a). Draft Final Implementation Document for Decommissioning (Phase I) Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Interim Response Action. January 7, 199 1. DCN: 7760-009-RT-BNWG Harding LawsonAssociates (1991b). Final Implementation Document for Rinse water Transfer (Phase II) Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Interim Response Action. November 1991. DCN: 7760-028-RT-BWWJ Harding Lawson Associates (199 1 c). Amendment to the Final Decision Document for theIRA atthe RMA Hydrazine Blending Storage Facility. August 9, 1991.DCN: 7760-009-RT-BTWF Harding Lawson Associates. RMA IRA H Phase II Hydrazine Blending and Storage Facility. Final Decommissioning Technical Report. November 1992. DCN: 7760-028-RT-CLHX International Technology Corporation. Decommissioning ofHydrazine Blending and Storage Facility Final Engineering Report. October 1993. DCN: 7760-040-RTCYKH US Department ofJustice. Federal Facility Agreement and Settlement Agreement to Ensure the Continued Cleanup ofRocky Mountain Arsenal. February 17, 1989. Document Control Number: TES

UAWPD0CS\HYDRAZ1N.WPD 1020000.30 3.10

WELD CO. 76

BOULDER CO. 85 BARR LAKE 25

R0 CK Y..-L,. JEFFERSON CO. MOUNTAIN*ý,, SENAL 270 L-r

STAPLETON ADAMS CO. AIRPORT 70 DENVER CO. ARAPAHOE CO. 225 C. 

## E

n CHERRY CREEK RESERVOIR

DOUGLAS CO.



## 0 1 2 3 4 5

Scale In M1193 

### Figure Prepared for: LOCATION MAP OF U.S. Army Program Manager's Office ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL For Rocky Mountain Arsenal Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland......- seessoo-00, North of FWA 0 Oll-post Ground.ater intercept intercept Area and Treatment System (D 1-p-- m f North Boundary Sy,t,- and E,,alualion Of Existing Boundary SYst4ms G,ond-olef Int4rcept and treatment Systorn North of Basin r ve(tical Conlom;nOllOn Control C;,ound-otdf Intercept and Treatt"Ant North 5mr4wY System in the Basin A Neck Arco System (D Basin F Clquids. Sludge$. and Soill Rcrotdiation 

### (D Building 1727 Sump Lijuid Buln F (D @ closure of the Hydrazine Facility IrtenDept acurvifiry Ar" z aystern rugitive Oust Control Se.er Romediat;on Asbestos Removal 9h RwTw Ation mediation of Other DAdN Contaminant Sources 1727 Waste to, Ilrealmeftl Sump rocifil"y 

### E) chemical ProcessBasin A Related Activities Heck Ar"O\ IwdWe System

'dole Llmo 34t*V @ Ba" " 0 -t (9)

0) @Q Stwell Twat. CMCLý Waotowsliir 0 ."' Trostmord Fao§tY Bkcw*v swiwy ww Storage Facility RW SO- 10 (D Cteýsfficsdon I set Yard 84 motor Pod Are* @ 

# (30

Farm (D Ar." VAd- (9 Areenel YM. 2500 E) kww wide SCO14 im

root

SOURCE: FINAL DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES REPORT, U.S. ARMY, OCTOBER 1995 

## LOCATION MAP WENN RMA INTERIM RESPONSE ACTIONS

CDH FEDERAL PROGRAMS ION 

## COMMERCE CITY, COLORADO Figur 2IWAH 1005 T2S 71h Avenue T3S

West Area

U) East Area W Slagin- Area VerticalTanks Containing Hydrazine orizontal Tanks Wastewater I FBldg755 t H US-3 Slag rea9 Overhead Piping US- 4 Security Fence Bldg T 868-C LTn--- und '7Gro Drum Storage Sump

--- i I CRZ A.r-. Unpaved Access/Security Road Hydrazine/ Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF)

EXPLANATION Fence Surrounding Exclusion Zones ContarnInadon Reduction Zones Railroad NotTo Scale Figure 3 Prepared for: Program Manager for HYDRAZINE BLENDING AND STORAGE FACILITY MAP Rocky Mountain Arsenal Commerce City, ColoradoTable 1. Summary of Analytical Results for Site 1-7, Page I of I

Concentration fug/g) DataChem CAL Number of Standard Detection Detection Constituent Samples* Range Median** Mean** Deviation** Limit Limit Volatiles (N-39)
MI9K 1 1 - - - 0.5 0.5 Senivolatiles (M-54) Dieldrin 1 0.4 0.3 0.3 1CP Metals IN-54) Cadmium 1 1.7 - - - 0.74 0.66 Chromium 39 8.1-27 13 14 4.4 6.5 5.2 Copper 52 5.8-81 14 22 16 4.7 4.9 Lead 29 11-130 17 25 28 0.4 13 Zinc 53 24-150 60 68 32 8.7 9.5 HydrazLnes (N-54)

None detected r-3 ko Mitrosamiiies (R-54)

None detected

Dibromochloropropane (Ho54)

None detected

Arsenic (H-54) 5 3.1-12 3.4 5.2 3.4 2.5 5.0 Mercury (Nw54) 2 0.086-0.092 - - - 0.050 0.060

N - Number of samples analyzed

- Number of samples In which constituent was detectedl only these samples'were used In statistical analyses

- Median, mean, and standard deviation not calculated when constituent detected In fewer than 5 samples

Site 1-7 5244A/1142A TV... Q/P/AATable 2. Summary of Analytical Results for Site 1-7. Phase 11. Page 1 of 1 Concentratinn (ag/r) DataChem CAL Number of Standard Detection Detectim Constituent Samples* Range me"** Mean" Deviation" Limit Limit

Volatiles (N:i 11 None detected Volatile enated Cominunds (N 11) Nonedetected Semiyglatiles (N = 34) Diekbin 2 1-5 0.3 0.3
Pihl1O9&bknU== (N = 21 None detected Qaamlhlorine Pestickks (N Aldrip 2 0.002-0.01 0.002 Hexac. -brocycilopentadiene I o.M - - - 0.002 - Dieldr,'4i 1 0.5 - - - 0.003 - Endrin 1 0.02 - - - 0.006 - 1sodrin 1 0.003 - - - 0.001 - DichlorodiplItenylethane 1 0.01 - - - 0.002 - DiclýL'6rodiphenyltrichllonxdme 1 0.02 - - - 0.002 - Qrgm'm=n Compaun&q (N = 561 None detected Q131111=11fur-Commods (N 12) Nonedletected 1CPMemLt-aLmM Caftium 4 IA-3.8 - - - 0.74 0.66 Chromium 25 11-27 19 19 4.6 6.5 5.2 Copper 18 7.1-95 13 20 20 4.7 4.9 LAW 11 12-140 27 42 37 8.4 13 Zinc 26 30-630 60 130 180 8.7 9.5
Arsenic fN = It) 4 3A-20 - - - 2.5 5.0
MercLia (N = 21 1 0.083 0.050 0.060

N - Number of samples analyzed W Number of samples In which constituent was detected; only these samples were used In statistical analyses. W Median, mean, and standard deviation not calculated when constituent detected In fewer than 5 samples.
1-7-11.1 Summary/Task 20/Rov. 2113/89Table 3. Interim Response Action H Analytical Program Summary Certified Reporting Decision Document Technology- based Method Method Limit Action Level Action Level Analyte Development !Qertification (Ag/1) (UP,/I) NDMA Yes Yes 0.042 TBD Hydrazine Yes Yes 9.9 2.5 9.9 MMH Yes Yes 7.5 20 7.5 UDMH Yes Yes 25 25 25

pg/I micrograms per liter NDMA = N-nitrosodimethylamine MMH = monomethyl hydrazine UDMH = unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine TBD = to be determined
11792,640 - TR 0725080492